CITY OF SOUTH LYON

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

March 8, 2004

 

 

Mayor Doyle called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

Mayor Doyle led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

 

PRESENT:            Mayor Doyle

            Council Members: Crawford, Dryer, Schwarck, and Wallace

Attorney Parvin Lee

City Clerk/Treasurer Zemke

Department Heads: Martin & Renwick

ABSENT:            City Manager Cook

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

 

Councilman Dryer stated that under Approval of the agenda, he would like his comment changed to reflect that he expected that the issue of a seven member Council would be on this agenda, not that it would have to be requested to be added to the agenda. 

 

CM 3-1-04- APPROVAL OF MINUTES – FEBRUARY 9, 2004

 

     Motion by Crawford, supported by Dryer

 

     To approve the minutes of the regular meeting of February 9, 2004 as amended

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

APPROVAL OF MONTHLY BILLS: 

 

Discussion was held on various bills

 

CM 3-2-04- APPROVAL OF MONTHLY BILLS

 

     Motion by Wallace, supported by Crawford

 

     To approve the monthly bills as presented

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

 

CM 3-3-04- APPROVAL OF AGENDA

 

     Motion by Crawford, supported by Schwarck

 

     To approve the agenda as presented

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

CITIZEN’S SUGGESTIONS

 

1.  Discussion with State Senator Nancy Cassis, State Representative Craig DeRoche, and County Commissioner Jeff Potter

 

Oakland County Commissioner Jeff Potter introduced Julia Ruffin from Oakland County who helped put together his presentation.  He gave a brief presentation on the Oakland County government including budget highlights, expenditures, division of governments, etc.  He discussed the Road Commission for Oakland County and on-going, as well as upcoming road projects.  He discussed public safety as a top priority including the upgrade to the County helicopter, radio improvements, HAZMAT training and Homeland Security.  County Commissioner Potter discussed the West Nile effort, health services and Parks and Recreation within the County.  He discussed the Economic Development within the County and the companies that have been assisted as well as the number of jobs that have been created.  He discussed the Technology Department and the County’s website and encouraged residents to look at the website for upcoming events and programs.

 

Senator Nancy Cassis stated that she appreciates the opportunity to come and update South Lyon on what is happening in Lansing, and more importantly, what affects the City of South Lyon and the surrounding communities.  Last Friday, thanks to the efforts of Representative DeRoche, we got together with Commissioner Potter, Governor’s staff, Mayor Potter and other City staff as well as representatives of the South Lyon Community Schools to showcase this building and show what can be done to accommodate a growing area through cooperation.  We have many challenges we face because we are in a growing corridor and we need to ensure the quality of life.  Our State’s economy has been a major focus because what happens at the State affects the County as well as local communities.  We want to keep and attract new businesses and jobs.  We need to meet the needs of people’s health, safety and welfare, and to that goal, she was able to get an amendment to a bill that would establish and allow for two hospitals in our area.  Providence Park in Novi and Henry Ford in West Bloomfield will be able to transfer approximately 1/3 of their beds to these smaller districts.  Roads are always a focus because without a good road system we are at a distinct disadvantage.  She discussed her three areas of focus; good safe roads, lowering tax burden, and keeping the excellent quality of our schools.  She discussed the Wixom and Beck interchange improvements.  Beck is proceeding on time and on a day to day basis, she is fighting to ensure that Wixom will be restored.  They have informally been told that the Federal Highway dollars have been restored and increased, and if Michigan’s share comes in a little higher, they have been assured that Wixom will go back on the table in 2005.  The Ten Mile Road corridor is a major artery with many new homes being built.    Talks with South Lyon, Lyon Township and Novi have been moving forward.  She discussed the State’s $40 billion budget with a shortfall of about $1 billion.  The way the Governor is choosing to deal with this is to put it on the backs of taxpayers with $400 million in increased taxes mainly in the form of cigarette and an increase in excise tax on liquor.  She discussed a report from the Auditor General indicating approximately $120 million that Treasury has not collected in tax dollars.  She does not feel that we should look at increasing taxes until we can be sure that our Treasury is going to be able to collect the taxes.  The Treasurer has 60 days to respond to the audit and make sure that we are doing everything to collect these dollars.  She discussed a strategy of the Governor to shift the collection of all County taxes to the summer, which would allow the County to hold those funds in a reserve fund, and the Governor wants to take away the statutory revenue sharing from the County.  That would mean approximately $1 million loss to Oakland County and $240 million to Wayne County.  The taxpayer would have to get all of the dollars together for one payment in July.  She discussed new manufactured housing bills being discussed to ensure equity and fairness in terms of manufactured housing.  She discussed the three approaches either a tiered increase or go to an ad valorum tax phased in over five years, or change the composition of the Manufactured Housing Commission. She discussed identity theft legislation, which is a major issue and the ongoing effort to be sure that our tax structure is fair and equitable.  She stated it is a pleasure to represent the City of South Lyon and all of the people within her district and appreciates all the support.  Senator Cassis stated that she is having coffee at the Bistro on Saturday at 10:30 a.m. for anyone who wants to attend.

 

State Representative Craig DeRoche stated that he is on a committee that will be considering a constitutional amendment dealing with the death penalty.  He stated that his feeling is that the State of Michigan needs to have the option to impose the death penalty for crimes such as those in the City of Detroit that took the lives of two police officers.  He stated that having served on the Council for the City of Novi, he looks at how cities do their business, and the City of South Lyon is the envy of many communities because of how you run your government and manage your finances as well as the School district.  He stated that his district is the district of urban sprawl with Novi, Lyon Township and South Lyon, and he feels that people look at how the city tends to the finances and how the school district is operated when they decide where they want to live.  We have one of the best areas, if not the best area in the State of Michigan to live and work. He discussed the State Revenue Sharing, and as Senator Cassis discussed, the $40 billion budget and the $1 billion problem.  The Governor has not fixed the problem, but only moved numbers and the only people that have been hurt by the cuts have been the cities and the universities.  We actually spent $114 million more last year than the year before and we still have a $1 billion problem.  It is unfortunate that the revenue sharing has been cut while at the same time MDOT has hired 178 new full time employees that are not working on the roads, and we have gone from 34 road projects down to 17.  He stated that he will continue to fight to protect our local governments.  He discussed the two hospitals and the need of the communities to have a hospital available without having to travel down I696 to get to a full service hospital.  He discussed the Ten Mile Road project and getting it in the pipeline and have a project available when the opportunity arises to negotiate and apply for money, which was done successfully in Novi for the Grand River expansion and Twelve Mile Road project.  He discussed the Teacher Felony bill, which is slated for Senate floor activity.  This bill was drafted specifically because of a teacher in the South Lyon district who was convicted of his fourth felony.  Currently, a teacher convicted of a felony can go into a tenure commission and still keep his job and receive back pay once they get out of prison regardless of the felony they are convicted of.  The bill would allow for that person to lose their license, with due process, and not allow them to go from one district to another, which happens unfortunately quite frequently.  So far these issues have been swept under the rug and let these people go back into the classroom.  He thanked Council for allowing him to speak.  He stated that he is always available for questions.

 

Mayor Doyle thanked all three representatives for coming.

 

  1. Appointment/Reappointment – Mayor Doyle

 

Mayor Doyle stated that we have a letter from the Housing Commission requesting that Janice Courtade be reappointed to that commission for another five-year term.  We also have a number of terms on the various boards and commissions that have expired. He has talked to all of these individuals.

 

CM 3-4-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – HOUSING COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Crawford

 

     To re-appoint Ms. Janice Courtade to the Housing Commission to a term expiring November 2008

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

CM 3-5-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – PLANNING COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Dryer

 

     To re-appoint Mr. Ronald Morelli to the Planning Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

CM 3-6-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – PLANNING COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Schwarck

 

     To re-appoint Mr. Keith Bradley to the Planning Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

CM 3-7-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – PLANNING COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Wallace

 

     To re-appoint Ms. Pamela Weipert to the Planning Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

CM 3-8-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Crawford

 

     To re-appoint Mr. James Gawrych to the Zoning Board of Appeals to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

CM 3-9-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Dryer

 

     To re-appoint Mr. John Druskinis to the Zoning Board of Appeals to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY                                                         

CM 3-10-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Schwarck

 

     To re-appoint Ms. Margaret Kurtzweil to the Parks & Recreation Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

CM 3-11-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Crawford

 

     To re-appoint Mr. Randall Cortright to the Parks & Recreation Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

CM 3-12-04 – RE-APPOINTMENT – HISTORICAL COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Crawford

 

     To re-appoint Ms. Gail Smolarz to the Historical Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Mayor Doyle stated that Mr. Jack Sellers has asked to not be reappointed to the Historical Commission.  He is 95 years old and has been a member of that Commission for many years.  He is an active member of Kiwanis and served on the City Council back in the 80s.  Councilman Wallace stated that he is one of the people responsible for getting cable television in South Lyon and should be saluted for all he has contributed to this community.

 

Mayor Doyle stated that Mr. Larry Ledbetter has made application to fill this vacancy.  Ms. Gail Smolarz has also highly recommended him.

 

CM 3-13-04 – APPOINTMENT TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION

 

     Motion by Doyle, supported by Schwarck

 

     To appoint Mr. Larry Ledbetter of 866 Norchester to the Historical Commission to a term expiring March 2007

 

VOTE:                                                                                     MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Mr. Ledbetter introduced himself.  He stated that he has lived in the City of South Lyon for 28 years and works locally at the tube mill.  He has been a Scout Leader for 25 years.  He stated that he enjoys being a resident of this community and looks forward to serving on the Historical Commission.

 

Mayor Doyle stated that the City Manager has a couple of appointments to make, which will be handled at a future meeting.

 

  1. Community Survey

 

 

Mayor Doyle stated that this is a survey done every two years.  There are some changes that need to be made to the questions that may no longer apply or projects that have been completed.

 

Councilman Dryer stated that he would like to see some priority-based questions.  Discussion was held on various question changes.  Discussion was held on the question relating to the increase in Council from five to seven members.  Councilman Dryer stated that regardless of whether this is on the survey or not, he believes that it is something that this Council should discuss.  The consensus of Council was that this question should be added.

 

Discussion was held on the wording of the question relating to a new police facility.  It was stated that if we had to go with General Obligation bonds for the building of this facility, it would have to go to a vote of the people anyway.

 

Councilman Dryer stated that he would like to change the column “Don’t Know” to “No Opinion”.  He stated that he would like a question added regarding budget priorities.  Mayor Doyle questioned whether this was needed.  He stated that we have a good handle on this ourselves.

 

Councilman Wallace stated that this is approximately 20 questions and is a random survey of approximately 700 people.  Mayor Doyle stated that he would encourage any resident who receives one, to please take a few minutes to fill it out and return it.

 

Discussion was held on the question regarding a joint Planning Commission with Lyon Township.  Mayor Doyle stated that after reading the act, he would not be in support of that joint effort due to the fact that our individual Planning Commissions would have to be dissolved and he would doubt Lyon Township would be in support of it.  Councilman Wallace agreed that the question should simply be removed.  Councilman Dryer stated that he does not see the harm in asking the question.  Mayor Doyle stated people would not know the details and ramifications of such a venture.

 

Discussion was held on time frame for this survey to be distributed and returned.  City Clerk/Treasurer Zemke stated that we would be looking at receiving the surveys back by mid-April with results to Council the beginning of May.

 

  1. Stage II Final Site Plan Approval – Gateway Commons

 

Mayor Doyle stated that we had preliminary site plan approval of this Planned Development back in July.  We now have a recommendation from the Planning Commission for approval of the final site plan.

 

Kristen Cunningham, Director of Community and Economic Development, stated two years ago, the developer approached the City with a Planned Development for the corner of Eleven Mile and Pontiac Trail in accordance with our Master Plan.  Informal discussions were held between the developer and the Planning Commission in an attempt to make a compatible plan with the community.  Originally, the proposed 128 units was changed to 64 units.  They worked hard on landscaping, screening, placement, etc. to accommodate both the Planning Commission and address most of the residents’ concerns.  The developer has done an excellent job in trying to address the needs of the residents, within reason. They have a commercial development including a Big Boy Restaurant, Comerica Bank, a produce market and a number of other smaller commercial stores.  The Planning Commission at their January 22nd meeting recommended final approval contingent upon a number of items.  Vilican Leman has gone through the plan, the attorney has reviewed the master deed and HRC has tended to the engineering issues.  HRC is comfortable in handling the final engineering items during the engineering stage after final approval or handled administratively.  There were a couple of changes to the master deed needed, which has now been completed.

 

Mr. Jim Barnas, Boardwalk Investment Group, stated that this has been a two year process, but it has been a good process.  The Planning Commission has done a great job, the consultants and staff have added to this project, and the plan has changed a number of times.  We are at a point now that they are ready to put a shovel in the ground.  Six months ago, they received Stage I approval.  Since that time, there have been some changes.  Originally, they were looking at Walgreens. Rite Aid will now be relocating from its present location to this new site.  He introduced representatives from Rite Aid, Comerica Bank, and Big Boy as well as the developer of the residential portion and their engineering consultants.  Originally, they looked at just commercial use.  The Planning Commission asked that they look at a bigger PUD, which would also incorporate residential, which they did.  He discussed the residential portion and the change in look of the condominiums.

 

Mayor Doyle asked if all signs would be in conformance with the Sign Ordinance.  Mr. Barnas stated that Vilican Leman did look hard at this issue.  They will have 3 monument signs, two on Pontiac Trail one for the residential portion along Eleven Mile, and all will meet with the Sign Ordinance requirements.  The question was asked if there would ever be a sign on the wall.  Mr. Barnas stated that there would be no sign on the wall, they are proposing ivy that will hang down.  Councilman Schwarck stated that he would prefer not to see typical colored Big Boy logos.

 

Discussion was held on the type of material for the concrete wall.  Mr. Barnas stated that it is made up of concrete poured units, it is not a concrete poured wall.  It is an engineered system.

 

Councilman Dryer asked, in the retail area, there are a couple of handicap spots at one end, should there be some at the other end.  Attorney Lee stated that handicap parking is regulated by the State law.  Councilman Dryer stated he is requesting that the spaces be evened out.  There is no reason to debate them because they will be put in as State law requires.  This is not a site plan issue; as uses change, requirements change.

 

Councilman Dryer stated that the parking lot is one big asphalt lot, not broken up with islands between them, etc. Mr. Barnas stated that they have had15+ meetings and the planners and architects have spent two years working on this and it is landscaped per your consultant’s requirements.  Councilman Dryer stated that he feels it should have more character.  There is no character, it is just one large lot.  Councilman Wallace stated that some of the other parking lots in town have these islands that are run over and become a hazard.  Mayor Doyle stated that these are site plan issues.  The Stage I approval handles design issues and Stage II would handle the next level of engineering. 

 

Councilman Dryer stated that in regards to the residential area, when he looks at these units, he sees a lot of shingles and garages, not brick or stone areas.  He asked if there was a reason why this was done this way.  Mr. Barnas stated that they are all two-story units, and the front elevations are almost all brick and stone, therefore he is not sure what is being asked.  Councilman Crawford stated that the design issues have been reviewed and approved by our Planning Commission, and we need to trust their judgment and planning skills.  Councilman Dryer stated that he would prefer to trust his own judgment as to what he thinks looks nice.

 

Councilman Dryer asked Attorney Lee what is it that we are reviewing and acting on at this point.  Attorney Lee stated that the general concept and densities were approved preliminarily.  At this point, you have a recommendation from the Planning Commission, and you can reject it, approve it, or remand it back to the Planning Commission for review of proposed changes.  The one issue not dealt with through the Planning Commission was the issue of ivy on the wall.  Mayor Doyle stated that this issue has been dealt with tonight.  It was stated that it is in one of the attachments, therefore it is a matter of record.

 

Councilman Wallace asked if the Big Boy would serve liquor.  Owner of the Big Boy located at 800 N. Pontiac Trail in Walled Lake and owner of the proposed Big Boy, stated that they will not be pursuing a liquor license.

 

Councilman Wallace stated that he does not like to see townhouse units next to some of the most affluent homes in the community and does not understand why the Planning Commission approved that.  He stated that this goes along with what Lyon Township has been saying, which is that every time we get a piece of property, we rezone it to small units, and they are right.

 

Councilman Dryer stated that the plan itself has a nice transition between the commercial and residential and the residential to Carriage Trace, but in between you have some large parcels.  Mr. Barnas stated that if you look at the units adjacent to the existing residential units in elevation format, it looks like single-family units.  They have tried to cluster those closest to the existing single family, so you go from single family to two unit condos, and as you get to the center of the development, that is where the three and four unit buildings are.  Mayor Doyle stated that we have a similar situation at Eagle Heights where we have detached single family next to multiple family, and there is a nice flow.  The question was asked if there was any thought given to having detached condos on the outer rim.  Mr. Barnas stated that they did not pursue that. 

 

Discussion was held on the tree parcels on Eleven Mile not included in the development.  Mr. Barnas stated that they did try and assemble that within the PUD, unfortunately the cost of those three units was way beyond what the development could afford.

 

 

Discussion was held on the gate between the residential and commercial.  Mr. Barnas stated that this was a requirement of the Fire Department.  The question was asked if the Fire Department has approved the plan including the turning radiuses.  Ms. Cunningham stated that the Fire Department has signed off on the plan.

 

Ms. Lisa Morgan of 1108 Surrey stated that her property backs up to the proposed condominiums.  She stated that the City should consider making this process more resident friendly.  It would have been nice to get a letter when this property was changed in the Master Plan because that was the time they should have gotten involved.  Although she does not own the property, she had hoped she would be looking at the trees on this property for years to come.  She stated that they put their life savings into their home, and now they will be looking at the back of condominiums.  Before they purchased their property, they called the City who assured them that this would remain R1-A.  They have attended most of the meetings and many people voiced their opposition to this development.  Since that time, she has tried to get some of their neighbors involved, yet they feel that what they said had no bearing, and it seems as though the fear of litigation by the developer is a major factor in the process.  She said it is different when you know going in that there will be a shopping center on that corner, but for her she wasn’t given that choice.  They were told it would be single family residential.  The developer did reduce the number of condominiums, however their first plan of 128 units was not feasible anyway. She asked for additional setback, and the developer did give some setback relief, but the benefit did mainly go to a homeowner who has invested in the development.  During the final site plan process, the condos did change drastically and the Planning Commission did make them go back and correct that, but they were still not to the level they were during preliminary site plan.  The people who are paying taxes are not in control, it is clear that the process favors the developer.  She stated that her question to the City Council is; is this what we want as the gateway to our community, does this protect the interest of the residents.  What they would like to see is that this plan be sent back to the Planning Commission and call for single family homes.

 

Mayor Doyle stated that overall the process is fair.  This process started two years ago.  He stated that he can appreciate where she is coming from.  Discussion was held on when the Master Plan changed this to PUD in 2002, and when this was done, there was nobody here, no letter or anything until a project materialized.  He stated that he spent several years on the Planning Commission and has never seen a developer go through and be as accommodating as this one.  We are really past the point of “Not in my backyard”.  We have preliminary site plan review and approval at both Planning Commission and City Council now final approval at the Planning Commission.  It is not a done deal until Council signs off on it.  We treat all the developers the same.

 

Chairman of the Planning Commission Ron Morelli stated that everyone who sits on boards and commissions of the City are taxpayers.  The developers come in, but the taxpayers are in control.  We volunteer our time and make the best decisions possible.  In almost ten years of sitting on the Planning Commission, he has not seen a developer be so accommodating.  This is a long process, and many developers would have backed out a long time ago.  The residents had a huge input and a lot of things changed because of them.

 

Discussion was held on some of the aspects of the plan that changed due to the residents’ input, including change in setbacks, number of units dropping, landscaping, change to incorporate the 2 unit buildings along the perimeter, etc.  Chairman Morelli stated that the residents had a lot of input.

 

Discussion was held on the landscape plan and the plan indicating exactly where the trees will be located

 

Mr. Tom Duncan of 60440 Eleven Mile Road stated that not too many people have stood up for the public’s interest in this development.  He feels that the Planning Commission has given the community what they most feared and that is commercial past the 10 ½ Mile Road limit that we were accustomed to.  This is not going to be the last development to the north, they will just keep adding to the north, and it will not maintain the character of our community.  We now have three greenway approaches into the City, which is remarkable and we are one of the only City’s in the County with this.  Even after the High School was constructed, there was still a green entry into the City.  In terms of protecting the interest of the Community, he wants to speak out on that.  It is not beyond a place to be turned around.  You need to know what your community desires in large numbers because that is who you represent, the majority of the people.  He stated that he and his family have lived there since 1975. They were assured when they were incorporated into the City, which was not what they wanted, that the property in question would remain R1-A.  They never imagined that the City would approve a plan that would allow the largest lot sizes next to the lowest residential lot sizes.  He stated that he was surprised that the Planners would think that this was acceptable with such diverse zones.  This reduces the values of all of these people’s property that surround this development, and these are values put on by the City.  You have cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars in value.  You have reduced the quality of their lives from their expectations of adjacent R1-A property to producing large amounts of lights with street lighting, large amount of asphalt paving, huge increase in traffic and much larger amount of density reducing their privacy.  There is still 25 foot back-yard setbacks, which is why you do not put R1-A next to RM.  This is not compatible and nobody in their right mind would think that is good planning.  Mr. Duncan read from the Zoning Ordinance regarding considering the adjacent uses and zoning next to the Planned Development.  The primary use of Planned Development is not for the developer but for the people.  He further read from the zoning ordinance regarding commercial next R1-A.  The purpose is to develop a unique, compatible plan and it must have a beneficial affect on present and potential surrounding land uses.  It is not intended for the purpose of rezoning when you have a parcel by parcel rezoning.  He discussed signage for proposed rezoning.  You cannot use PD zoning to hide what you really intend to do.  He stated that we can still do some transitional zoning that would be acceptable by adjacent property owners.   He would suggest that you protect the adjacent property owners and require the developer back to the Planning Commission with R1-A sized lots next to existing R1-A, and what he chooses to do inside that ring would be his burden not theirs and he would absorb the loss.  They are not opposed to change, but they are opposed to being taken advantage of.

 

Mr. Christian Krauter stated that he is a long-time taxpayer of this community for over 34 years.  He stated that they were told years ago that the City would never expand north of Eleven Mile.  The Duncan family owned the farm, which was broken up and sold to a developer, which caused all of these properties to be annexed into the City.  This is when the sprawl started and has progressed steadily north.  They were annexed against their will and have never received a single thing for the increase in taxes, including being ignored for the extension of water and sewer.  He stated that he would like to thank the Planning Commission for volunteering their time.  They have spent several years developing the Master Plan.  These meetings were public meetings and noticed, anyone could have been there and people should not complain now about what took place at those meetings.  In the past, many projects have been proposed for this site and all have passed by. This developer has worked for two years and he believes that this group has stuck to it and accommodated the community.  He wishes to commend both the Planning Commission and the Boardwalk group for their hard work.

 

Ms. Shelly Thorsen of 1102 Surrey stated that she should would simply like to reiterate what has already been stated by Ms. Morgan and Mr. Duncan.  She discussed the setbacks of the condominiums.

 

Mr. Brad  Heiler of 1096 Surrey stated that he agrees with the comments made by the other homeowners.  It does not make sense why the City would want to rezone this property and put some of the largest, most expensive homes in the City next to multiple family.  It needs to be compatible with the existing property, and Council needs to protect the interest of its residents and the investments they have in their homes

 

Mrs. JoAnne Duncan of 60440 Eleven Mile Road stated that her mother did sell much of this property.  She stated that they do not object to the property being developed.  When the High School was proposed, they did not object, but rather thought that this would be a wonderful place for a high school.  They are asking that you consider them and what is already there.  Council’s job is to protect them, because they are there already. They did not want to become part of the City and they have received no benefit.  She stated that she does appreciate the volunteers on these boards; she is a volunteer through their church and does not do it because she wants recognition.  She stated that they did not get involved when the Master Plan was being developed because they did not know that they would be so directly affected.  She stated that the City should consider sending out a letter to the homeowners that are so affected so that these things can be worked out ahead of time and there is not all this afterthought.  Also, it is a good idea to put up a sign when a rezoning is proposed.  When they built their house, they knew that something would be developed, but they are asking that you look at something that would be compatible.

 

Chairman Ron Morelli stated that any property that comes into the City comes in at R1-A .  If you look at some of the very large developments going on in our area similar to this, it does not decrease property values.  These are nice condominiums, maybe not million dollar units, but nice nonetheless.  They made sure these will be upscale and compatible.  At the public hearing, the head of the sales department of Carriage Trace came to them and said he could sell these; these are very compatible.  It is not fair to say that because they are condominiums next to R1-A housing that they are not compatible.

 

Mr. Merle Ditto of 1035 Oxford stated that City Council, Planning Commission, etc. have thankless jobs.  He has heard nothing but good things about Mr. Morelli and his Commission and we have to trust in their judgements. He questioned whether the parking area would be maneuverable, not like the current CVS parking lot.  Mayor Doyle stated that based on the drawings, it appears much larger.

 

Mayor Doyle thanked all of the residents for their comments.  He stated that more often than not, we do not have public input.  He stated that as Mr. Morelli has indicated, in these cases someone is going to be happy and someone is not.  We have to rely on a number of things, our Planning Commission, staff, and our engineers and consultants.  He is aware after serving on the Planning Commission, that it is never exactly perfect. 

 

Councilman Dryer asked why the wall was raised up and extended to 400 feet long.  Mr. Barnas stated that when you have a development of this size there is maximum and minimum grades you have to deal with from an engineering standpoint.  We have existing grades to deal with as well as wetlands.  To make this project work from an engineering standpoint, this is what we had to do.  Another aspect that was changed was the sanitary sewer and where they connect in order to make it work based on the City’s engineers recommendation.

 

Councilman Crawford stated that the Planning Commission has presented us with a proposal and we, as a City Council, must dispose of that proposal.

 

CM 3-14-04 – APPROVAL OF FINAL STAGE II SITE PLAN – GATEWAY COMMONS

 

     Motion by Crawford

 

     To approve the Final, Stage II Site Plan and rezoning for Gateway Commons

 

Motion died due to lack of support

 

Attorney Lee stated that last July, the City Council approved the Preliminary Plan and rezoning to PD for that property.  If you have specific objections to the site plan, Council has the right to either change them, remand them to the Planning Commission for revision, but it would be inappropriate to dismiss the matter before you.  The City is bound by the action that it took last July.  Mayor Doyle stated that Mr. Dryer was not part of the original process.  He stated that nothing has changed since July

 

Attorney Lee stated that if you have specific objections, you should remand it back to the Planning Commission with those specific objections because you have affected a zoning change by your preliminary approval.

 

Councilman Schwarck stated that the last time this was before us, we asked Mr. Morelli if the homeowners in Carriage Trace and Eleven Mile had their concerns addressed, and to the best of his knowledge at that time, their questions and concerns had been addressed.  None of these homeowners were at that meeting, and being they were not here to speak before or against it at that time, that is why he voted for the approval.  He stated that the issue of detached condominiums has not been explored.  He feels that we are close to an agreement, but these residents need to be happy.

 

Mayor Doyle stated that he can appreciate the concerns.  However, we have gone through the process and what we are saying is that we know better about planning than our Planning Commission.  Furthermore, if we go through and deny it at this point, this project could be in jeopardy or you could set us up for litigation and we will lose.  They have done everything that we have asked and to the letter of the law.  If they had brought in something totally different than what was originally approved, it would be different.

 

The question was asked what has changed between July and March.  Chairman Morelli stated that since preliminary approval, they looked at the building fascades, building materials, signage, planting materials, as businesses stepped forward, details were worked out.  This has been a work in progress.  They wanted to make sure that this is what we wanted at the gateway to our community.  They looked at all of the engineering requirements, grade changes, Fire Department requirements with tweaking turning radiuses, etc.  Discussion was held on the grade change and wall.  Chairman Morelli stated that it actually lessened the severity and impact on the adjacent property because if it was not done they would be looking at HVAC units on the roof etc.  He stated that he feels that it will look fine.  He discussed the changes in the wall as it goes down the line. 

 

Attorney Lee stated that within the advice that he gave in July of last year, he made very clear then that considering the rezoning of this property, you were accepting the preliminary plan and use of the property as set forth by the preliminary plan.  The City is bound by that decision made by Council.   If you have problems with how the residential portion is done, you can send it back to the Planning Commission, however you cannot change the multiple dwelling zoning.

 

Mayor Doyle stated that if you choose another route, you are setting us up for litigation.  It was stated that Mr. Crawford’s motion failed due to lack of support, a new motion is in order.

 

Mr. Tom Duncan stated that the Planning Commission violated the Open Meetings Act.  Mayor Doyle stated that this is the first he has heard about this and is not being discussed at this time.

 

CM 3-15-04 – APPROVAL OF STAGE II FINAL SITE PLAN – GATEWAY COMMONS

 

     Motion by Schwarck, supported by Crawford

 

     To approve the Planned Development, Stage II Final Site Plan for Gateway Commons

 

VOTE:                                                             ROLL CALL VOTE:              Schwarck –    Yes

                                                                                                            Dryer -             No

                                                                                                            Doyle -             Yes

                                                                                                            Crawford -       Yes

                                                                                                            Wallace -        No

 

                                                                                                            MOTION CARRIED

 

4.  Opinion/Order City of South Lyon vs. Oakland County Drain Commissioner

 

Mayor Doyle stated that as a result of litigation with Colonial Acres there was attorney costs incurred by the Oakland County Drain Commission.  They did go through and assessed these costs against the drainage district as well as the City at large.  The City then filed a motion in court and these monies collected for this assessment were held in escrow.  As of March 1st, Judge Nancy Grant ruled in our favor and the Plaintiff has 21 days in which to appeal.  If they do not file for appeal, we will then refund those monies to the people who paid them.  Attorney Lee stated that he does have informal notification from the County that they do intend to file an appeal and are asking that we continue to hold those monies.  We will oppose that motion on the basis that we feel that their appeal is frivolous.  We will know by March 23rd whether or not they have filed.

 

NEW BUSINESS:  None

 

CM 3-16-04 – ADJOURNMENT

 

     Motion by Wallace, supported by Dryer